Beer Nuts, Inc. v. King Nut Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that public interest in guarding against depletion of general vocabulary insufficient to override contract law
• concluding that party could not challenge a trademark as a descriptive word because it had contracted out of that recognized defense
• holding that public interest in guarding against depletion of general vocabulary insufficient to override contract law
• holding that “the public interest in [trademarks] ... is not so great that it should take precedence over the rule of the law of contracts that a person should be held to his undertakings”
• holding that a prior settlement agreement recognizing the validity of the plaintiff’s trademark precluded the defendant’s claim that the mark had become descriptive in a later infringement suit as “an attack upon the validity of the trademark”
• holding that a prior settlement agreement recognizing the validity of the plaintiff’s trademark precluded the defendant’s claim that the mark had become descriptive in a later infringement suit as “an attack upon the validity of the trademark”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).